The Transgender Persons Bill misses key demands

The current Bill mandates that people first apply to their local district magistrate to be recognised as transgender

On December 17, 2018, almost exactly a year after we had mobilised a nationwide protest against the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Bill, 2016, I was notified that the Lok Sabha was debating the Bill with 27 amendments proposed by the government. The debate could hardly be heard over the din, but the amendments were passed with barely enough time given to objections raised by opposition parties. This Bill is now pending before the Rajya Sabha, along with the Trafficking of Persons (Prevention, Protection and Rehabilitation) Bill, 2018 — both are a source of serious concern for the transgender community.

At the heart of our disappointment is the Bill’s contravention of the 2014 Supreme Court National Legal Services Authority (Nalsa) vs Union of India judgment, which upheld the right of transgender persons to self-identify their gender, and directed states to uphold this without mandating any form of bodily transition like surgery or hormonal therapy.

The current Bill, however, mandates that people first apply to their local district magistrate to be recognised as transgender, and that this change must reflect on all identity documents. The application is to be scrutinised by a District Screening Committee that includes local government officials, a psychologist and a single representative of the transgender community. It is preposterous that transgender identity — which emerges from the functioning of the brain, not from medically visible morphology — be assessed by someone else.

The Bill creates a two-tier system within the community, where everyone must first apply to the magistrate to be recognised as transgender, and only those who are recognised as such may apply to be recognised as man or woman, the latter contingent upon providing proof of sex reassignment surgery. It’s a denial of documents for persons who live and self-identify as men or women (and not as transgender), who may not want or be able to afford surgery, even if hormone therapy has largely changed their appearance.

The Bill represents a failure of the government to listen to our voices despite sustained efforts by the transgender community and our allies. Over the past few years, scores of depositions were submitted and gatherings were held, first targeting the social justice ministry when it drafted the Bill, and then the standing committee of both houses to whom the Bill was referred. The hope now is that the Rajya Sabha, which is expected to debate the Bill in the winter session, will direct a select committee to take on board the standing committee’s recommendations in light of the NALSA judgment, as well as the excellent provisions of the Private Member’s Bill proposed by DMK Member of Parliament Tiruchi Siva. This was drafted in consultation with the transgender community, and was passed by the Upper House in 2015.

A key demand missing in the 2018 Bill is that of reservation. Do you know of any transgender people who have been allowed into standard workspaces, or even informal sector